Chetan Kumar held for questioning credibility of Karnataka HC judge hearing hijab row

Amid the highly-controversial hijab row across Karnataka, Kannada film actor Chetan Kumar, a self-acclaimed activist, has been arrested for allegedly questioning the credibility of one of the judges of the Karnataka High Court, who is a jurist in the bench hearing petitions against the ban on hijab. The arrest comes to the fore after Kumar's tweet questioned Justice Krishna Dixit's 'clarity' to deal with such sensitive matters. Referring to an older tweet regarding Justice Dixit, Kumar mentioned the judge had made headlines for granting pre-arrest bail to a rape accused and having stated a controversial take on rape survivors. 

The Deputy Commissioner of Police of Central Division said in a statement, "Kannada film actor and activist Chetan Ahimsa has been arrested by Bengaluru City Police. An on-its own FIR was registered on Tuesday and under 505(2) and 504 of the IPC. Based on the tweet, the FIR was registered in Sheshadripuram Police Station."

While section 505(2) of the IPC provides for statements creating or promoting enmity, hatred or ill-will between classes, section 504 of the IPC provides for punishment to intentional provocation and insults to any person to disrupt public peace. 

Kannada film actor Chetan Kumar arrested

Chetan Kumar tweeted, with reference to his older tweet, mentioning Justice Dixit's observations during the trial of a rape case. Justice Dixit had reportedly said, "it is unbecoming of an Indian woman to sleep after rape; that is not the way women react when they are ravished." 

Taking to Twitter, the actor shared, "This is a tweet I wrote nearly two years ago regarding a Karnataka High Court decision Justice Krishna Dixit made such disturbing comments in a rape case Now this same judge is determining whether hijabs are acceptable or not in govt schools Does he have the clarity required? (sic)"

It is pertinent to note that Justice Krishna S Dixit hit the bulletin in June 2020 when a rape accused, also charged with cheating and criminal intimidation, was granted a pre-arrest bail while the concerned judge categorised the behaviour of the victim, after the alleged rape. In the case at hand, the victim told the court that she was 'tired' and fell to sleep' after the crime was committed. 

In consideration of the complainant's submissions, the judge had said it was 'unbecoming of an Indian woman' to sleep after she has been 'ravished' and 'after the perpetration of the act'. 

"That is not the way our women react when they are ravished," the judge said in the order. 

While the complainant's (rape survivor) counsel raised strong objections to the bail order of the accused, the judge was not convinced of the reasons for the victim's presence at her workplace at 11 PM, the day of the alleged rape crime. Further, Justice Dixit even questioned the rape survivor for she did not object to sharing 'drinks' with the accused and the same was mentioned as a reason in the bail order.